Hays v. Mayer

Citations

• 117 La. 1067
• 42 So. 505
• 1906 La. LEXIS 818

Syllabus

<p>1. Appeal — Dismissal—Error of Judge.</p> <p>The order of appeal granted in this case was the act of the court and not imputable to the appellant. The appeal was saved from dismissal on that account, by the provisions of article 898 of the Code of Practice. The trial judge should have fixed a particular return day for the return and not simply made the appeal “returnable according to law.” Appellant, however, was bound to know what the latest day for returns is by Act No. 92. p. 150, of 1900, and to govern himself accordingly.</p> <p>2. Same — Certificate of Clerk — Defects Therein.</p> <p>An error or defect in the certificate of the clerk not imputable to the appellant by the same article (article 898, Code Prac.) is not ground for dismissal on that account. In this instance appellee has no cause for complaint. An examination of the record satisfies the court that it has before it everything which was done below and everything necessary to pass upon the issues raised and decided in the lower court.</p> <p>Appellee does not suggest that anything is lacking, but relies upon the fact itself that the certificate is defective and insufficient.</p> <p>(Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 3, Appeal and Error, § 3126.]</p> <p>3. Same — Transcript—Delay in Filing.</p> <p>The transcript in this case was filed too late. If there was not sufficient time to have prepared the transcript, appellant should have applied, under article 883 of the Code of Practice, for an extension of time.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>